Thursday, June 7, 2012

Obama just caught in big lie?

Documents confirm he was member of socialist party

Has Barack Obama been caught in a lie that could become a major issue in the upcoming election?

During the 2008 presidential election campaign, Obama’s camp categorically denied he was ever a member of the New Party, which sought to elect members to public office with the aim of moving the Democratic Party far leftward to ultimately form a new political party with a socialist agenda.

The denial came amid reports of Obama’s participation with the party, including several articles by WND.

WND previously reported on newspaper evidence showing Obama was listed as a member of the New Party in the group’s own literature.

In 2010, John Nichols, Washington correspondent for The Nation magazine, recalled speaking with Obama at New Party events in the 1990s.

“When we spoke together at New Party events in those days, he was blunt about his desire to move the Democratic Party off the cautious center where Bill Clinton had wedged it,” wrote Nichols in a January 2009 piece published at Progressive.org.

Now, researcher and author Stanley Kurtz, writing at National Review Online today, reports on documentation from the updated records of Illinois ACORN at the Wisconsin Historical Society that “definitively establishes” that Obama was a member of the New Party.

Kurtz reported Obama also signed a “contract” promising to publicly support and associate himself with the New Party while in office.

In 2008, Obama’s Fight the Smears campaign website quoted Carol Harwell, who managed Obama’s 1996 campaign for the Illinois Senate, as stating: “Barack did not solicit or seek the New Party endorsement for state senator in 1995.”

Fight the Smears conceded the New Party did support Obama in 1996 but denied that Obama had ever joined.

According to documents from the Democratic Socialists of America, the New Party worked with ACORN to promote its candidates. ACORN, convicted in massive, nationwide voter fraud cases, was a point of controversy for Obama during his 2008 campaign for president.

Becoming a New Party member requires some effort on behalf of the politician. Candidates must be approved by the party’s political committee and, once approved, must sign a contract mandating they will have a “visible and active relationship” with the party.

If Obama indeed signed the contract, not only would his campaign be caught in a lie but it could prove highly embarrassing for him at a time when he is fighting claims, including from Mitt Romney’s camp, that his policies are socialist.

Also, Obama’s 2012 campaign slogan of “Forward” has been criticized for its use of a historic socialist slogan.

Socialist goals

The socialist-oriented goals of the New Party were enumerated on its old website.

Among the New Party’s stated objectives were “full employment, a shorter work week and a guaranteed minimum income for all adults; a universal ‘social wage’ to include such basic benefits as health care, child care, vacation time and lifelong access to education and training; a systematic phase-in of comparable worth; and like programs to ensure gender equity.”

The New Party stated it also sought “the democratization of our banking and financial system – including popular election of those charged with public stewardship of our banking system, worker-owner control over their pension assets [and] community-controlled alternative financial institutions.”

Many of the New Party’s founding members were Democratic Socialists of America leaders and members of Committees of Correspondence, a breakaway of the Communist Party USA.

Last month, WND reported on a 1996 print advertisement in a local Chicago newspaper that shows Obama was the speaker at an event sponsored and presented by the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA.

While Obama’s campaign in 2008 denied the then–presidential candidate was ever an actual member of the New Party, print copies of the New Party News, the party’s official newspaper, show Obama posing with New Party leaders, listing him as a New Party member and printing quotes from him as a member.

The party’s spring 1996 newspaper boasted: “New Party members won three other primaries this Spring in Chicago: Barack Obama (State Senate), Michael Chandler (Democratic Party Committee) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary).”

The newspaper lists other politicians it endorsed who were not members but specifies Obama as a New Party member.

New Ground, the newsletter of Chicago’s Democratic Socialists of America, reported in its July/August 1996 edition that Obama attended a New Party membership meeting April 11, 1996, in which he expressed his gratitude for the group’s support and “encouraged NPers (New Party members) to join in his task forces on voter education and voter registration.”

The New Party, established in 1992, took advantage of what was known as electoral “fusion,” which enabled candidates to run on two tickets simultaneously, attracting voters from both parties. But the New Party disbanded in 1998, one year after fusion was halted by the Supreme Court.

It started back in January with Bill Clinton saying, “Barack Obama is an amateur.”

Add to that, “The economy’s a mess, its dead flat. America has lost its Triple-A rating… “

Finish it with, Obama “doesn’t know how to be president,” and is “incompetent.”

And so began what has become a questionable alliance between Bill Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama...or is it more like a cleverly crafted payback for Obama grabbing the presidential nomination away from Hillary.

Bill Clinton is truly becoming an albatross around the neck of Obama’s re-election campaign and Republicans (like me) could not be happier.

Last week Clinton said, "I think he (Romney) had a good business career...the man who has been governor and had a sterling business career crosses the qualification threshold."

Makes you wonder whose side Bubba is really on.

Even though it’s obvious that Clinton got a late-night ‘what the hell did you say,’ phone call from the White House after that one, and even with him backtracking somewhat on that statement this week, the damage to Obama was done, and no one sees Bill or Hillary crying over it.

In a recent interview on CNBC, Bill Clinton stated that the U.S. is in “a recession” and that Congress “should extend all the George W. Bush’s tax cuts due to expire at the end of the year.”

“Extend all the Bush tax cuts...” Bill Clinton is actually publicly supporting a policy of George W. Bush, the man who Obama blames for all America’s economic woes...who’d have thunk it!

Barack Hussein Obama wants to extend tax cuts for middle class taxpayers only, wanting to end cuts for individuals making more than $200,000 a year, or for couples making $250,000. Could it be that it finally hit Bubba upside his head that he is one of those very individuals...just something to think about.

And then we have Obama sending Clinton into Wisconsin to campaign for union backed Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett against Governor Scott Walker in that ridiculous farce of a recall. We all know how that turned out and that Bubba was NO help to Barrett at all.

Obama is losing his so-called ‘magic touch’ as more and more Americans no longer buy into his progressive liberal rhetoric, and even the ‘big guns’ like Bill Clinton seem to no longer have the power, or even the will, to sway the voters as they once did.

The bottom line in all this is that Bill Clinton is purposely (while trying to stay below the radar) undermining Barack Hussein Obama in what appears to be a stealth jihad of sorts. I believe that he actually dislikes Obama’s entire agenda. Remember, Clinton balanced the federal budget...Obama can’t even get a budget passed. Clinton prided himself on bringing the races together...Obama is deliberately causing a racial divide unseen since the days of segregation. And the economy under Obama, in a word, stinks, as unemployment numbers continue to rise...under Clinton the economy, for the most part, thrived.

And no matter how much they play kissy-face in public, Bill Clinton has an ax to grind, because if Hillary had indeed been the nominee and won, the president of the United States would NOT be Hillary Clinton but would be the amalgam known as ‘Billary.’

As the saying goes, ‘payback is a bitch’ and Bill Clinton will make sure that that payback hurts Obama and hurts him big time...’aint revenge sweet!

N.J. Muslim group sues NYPD to stop routine counterterror efforts

Posted by Robert Spencer / Jihad Watch

If they're successful, what will happen? The NYPD will do less to stop jihad terror. Net result? More jihad terror. Since this is an entirely legal program, it is hard not to think that that is what the Muslims who are suing want.

"N.J. Muslim group sues NYPD to stop routine spying," by John Miller for CBS News, June 6 (thanks to all who sent this in):

(CBS News) A Muslim legal rights group is going to federal court Wednesday in New Jersey, claiming New York City's police department has violated the civil rights of innocent Muslims.

Earlier this year, the NYPD was criticized for a surveillance program targeting universities and mosques in several states.

The lawsuit is intended to take the controversy beyond the rhetoric and into the courtroom.

The NYPD says it's just doing its job, and doing it legally, but the group of New Jersey Muslims charges that the NYPD gathered secret files on Muslims, not because they were suspected of any crime, but simply because of their religion.

Abdul Kareem Muhammad is the imam of a mosque in Newark.

His mosque, like every other mosque in Newark, was listed in a secret NYPD intelligence report.

Imam Muhammad doesn't understand why his mosque in New Jersey was even mentioned.

He says he was "certainly" surprised that the New York police were involved. "We were surprised that this was going on, period," Muhammad says.

So were the imams of other mosques, Muslim schools, Muslim restaurants, Muslim-owned stores -- all listed in the NYPD report.

Now, some of them are suing.

"This surveillance, this spying, without question, was unjustified," says Muhammad. "And it was definitely, without doubt, an invasion of our civil, human and our constitutional rights."

To people who, in the post-911 world, would say Muslims are going to bear the brunt of a disproportionate amount of attention, Farhana Khera, executive director of Muslim Advocates, the group behind the lawsuit, says, "All Americans, including American Muslims, care deeply about our safety and security."

She says no other religion seems to be under the same microscope. "Just to give you an example," Khera notes, "there was reference in the documents to targeting, for example, the Iranian community, the Egyptian community, the Syrian community. But then there was explicit reference to the fact that they weren't targeting Syrian Jews or Iranian Jews or Egyptian Christians, but really, the focus was on Muslims."...

Uh, that's because Syrian Jews, Iranian Jews and Egyptian Christians aren't committing acts of violence worldwide in the name of their religion.

The lawsuit also charges that the NYPD monitored meetings and web postings of Muslim student associations.

One of the plaintiffs, Moiz Mohammed, is a molecular biology student at New Jersey's Rutgers University. He's a member of the Rutgers Muslim Student Association, which he describes as "an organization where students can come learn about Islam, participate, whether it be Muslim students or non-Muslim students. We cater to the whole university community."

The MSA is also a Muslim Brotherhood organization, so named in the same document in which the Brotherhood stated its goal of "eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within."

Mohammed says he's "never" heard any talk within the association of radicalization, or anyone suggesting violence.

"And," he adds, "I don't think anyone would actually say that in public, because all the other Muslims would not tolerate that behavior and that talk."

NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly and Mayor Michael Bloomberg have both defended the practice, saying the information the NYPD collects is within the department's guidelines, which are approved and monitored by lawyers and a federal judge....

The plaintiffs say they don't intend to get money out of the suit. The monetary damages, they say, have been nominal.

They hope to get two things: They want a set of rules saying the NYPD can't do the surveillance anymore, and they want a federal judge to put a stamp on that.

Black-on-white link in Minneapolis violence

'Let's stop being so P.C.' about 20-on-1 attacks

By Colin Flaherty / WND

Minneapolis police want you to know race has nothing to do with an epidemic of violent crime in their downtown.

Same for crime reporter Matt McKinney: The recent increase in what he calls “flash mob” violence and mayhem is “random” and “no other real pattern emerges” and the “motivation for the attack remains unclear.”

But more and more people in Minneapolis are connecting the violence with groups of blacks marauding through the downtown; beating, hurting, destroying and stealing. Sometimes right in front of police.

A lot of it on YouTube. With lots of witnesses – 15 to 20 times over the last year.

The attacks are part of a nationwide pattern of hundreds of episodes of unreported racial violence and lawlessness found in more than 50 cities over the last three years.

In Minneapolis, a headline from the Star Tribune tell part of the story, but conceals the rest: “Flash mob actions worry Minnesota police.” McKinney fills in some of the details about one of the incidents from March 2012:

“We were just biking, the three of us, having some laughs and enjoying the night,” said the cyclist, who didn’t want his name used out of fear for his safety. It was 7:45 p.m. and the street was crowded with people enjoying the unusually warm evening, he said.

Suddenly “some kid” ran up to the man’s friend and punched him in the face, breaking his jaw. Another eight to 10 youths surrounded the cyclists, yelling and trying to provoke a fight.
Two police officers had been watching seven youths at a bus stop when they saw them “suddenly surge” toward the cyclists.

As the officers gave chase, the group fled with one victim’s bike. They ran through the seating area at Oceanaire’s patio, picking objects off the tables to throw at one of the bicyclists running after them.

Eventually four people were arrested, all black.

The bikers got hurt, but they got off easy compared to the St. Patrick’s day mauling 20 black people inflicted on a Minneapolis graphic artist named Pieter. He suffered serious brain injuries and now has no short-term memory. A local bank has turned videos of the crime over to the police. He is afraid to use his last name.

An hour before he was beat and kicked into the Intensive Care Unit, 20 black people assaulted an out-of-town couple at the exact same intersection. The Star Tribune may be squeamish about reporting the race of the criminals, but City Pages is not:

Melissa screamed as three separate youths came at Kirk, throwing punches. Kirk says he was able to dodge the blows. He remembers one of the assailants smiling while he threw punches, “like it was fun.” As people on the street started to take notice of the attack, the mob dispersed, leaving Kirk one-on-one with a man he says was over 6 feet tall.

“I dodged several of his punches before he ran off,” Kirk said, adding that he himself didn’t punch anyone. “I believe that if it wasn’t for my wife’s screaming I would have been seriously injured.” Thankfully, he ended up with nothing more than a swollen neck. Melissa, a 33-year-old school teacher, was pushed, and one of the assailants burned her hand with a cigarette, she says.

After the mob dispersed, Kirk and Melissa made their way back to the Marquette. There, they talked to a police officer about the incident.

Wrote Melissa in an email: The “cop wasn’t that interested in taking a report, since we didn’t have descriptions – just African-American…[I] wonder how many people have been attacked, since our story isn’t even part of the stats.”

Over the past year, the Minneapolis area has been the scene of more than a dozen other examples of large scale racial attacks that are known.

A few weeks later, a group of black people attacked a mobile alcoholic beverage cart in Minneapolis – stealing, threatening. The newspapers dutifully reported the crime, and dutifully ignored the race of the attackers.

Except for the University of Minnesota newspaper, which in its early editions identified the attackers by race, but removed it in later editions.

Which is how it should be, said Minneapolis police spokesman William Palmer: “The MPD does not track arrestees by race,” said Palmer. “And frankly, no, it doesn’t matter. We arrest and prepare criminal cases for consideration of prosecution for those people who choose to break the law. Race has nothing to do with it.”

But the city does keep track of the race of officers in its affirmative action reporting and recruiting. According to the city website, “The City of Minneapolis is aware of its commitment as an equal opportunity employer and the efforts necessary to meet the responsibilities outlined in the Affirmative Action Plan. The City’s Department of Human Resources serves as a liaison through its ‘Connecting with the Communities We Serve’ program and maintains contact with the following community-sponsored action groups” including the Black Story Tellers Alliance, African Community Services, Minneapolis Urban League, Minnesota Multicultural Development Center, and other race-based groups.

The city also has a policy to “intensively recruit protected class persons,” including black people. And if they are having trouble qualifying for a job, the city will provide tutoring and change certification procedures to help select more “protected class persons.”

Blogger Neal Krasnoff says the violence is more widespread than the police or media are talking about:

“One of my friends was robbed at Nicollet and 7th. They harassed her, then one mutt knocked her down, pounded her head against the sidewalk, then took off with her cell phone. The perps are – yes, you and I guessed correctly – Male/Black/18-35. She’s the fifth person in her circle of friends to be attacked.”

The Star Tribune is loathe to discuss race. But many of the black people involved in the mayhem are not: They use YouTube to brag about their illegal exploits, as appears in the following video. Many other videos cannot be embedded because of the violence and language included.

Videos of groups of violent black people in Minneapolis are so numerous that some are even set to music.

McKinney and the police are not willing to talk about violence and how race is a part of it. But the readers of the paper, bloggers, and talk radio are.

“Let’s stop being so P.C. about all this,” said one reader of the Star Tribune. “It’s a racial thing, isn’t it? Isn’t it black youth who are the ones committing the vast majority of these downtown crimes, and aren’t they the ones harassing people downtown? Will this comment be censored? Isn’t what I’m saying factual, though, censored or not?”

Commenters on the Star-Tribune’s flash mob stories may be split over the significance of the paper refusing to report the race of the rioters. Some call for more jobs for minorities. Others say that noticing the rioters are black is racist.

Others point out race-conscious coverage of black ministers, black teachers, and other black institutions.

They wonder why it is acceptable to do hundreds of stories about everything in the black community except for large groups of black criminals creating danger and havoc in downtown Minneapolis.

The Patriot Factor

I’m an American Patriot who refuses to let our beloved country be changed into something unrecognizable to us by a man who wants to radically change and destroy our America and take away our children’s future. We patriots ARE the grassroots movement and we bloggers must spread the truth about the corrupt and traitorous Obama regime and his sanctioned islamization of America before it’s too late.
I'm also co-host with Craig Andresen of RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS on CPR Worldwide Media and co-head of CPR's Journalism Department again with Craig Andresen.